Another debacle for the public good
Posted 11 May 2012 - 07:28 AM
Posted 11 May 2012 - 08:27 AM
The expanded gambling is actually just the state's contribution. There is also the contribution from the city, coming from extra hospitality taxes and bumped tax rates in Minneapolis. Which happens to be where I live. So, yes, my tax dollars are paying for a stadium that I will probably not use because I'm not really a football fan.
What tax dollars? Do you even know anything about this bill? Public money is coming from expanded gambling. So unless you play the new electronic pull-tabs, you're not paying for this. Some money will come from user fees attached to the stadium, But unless you go to a game once again you're not spending any money.
I take it you were against Target Field as well. Should we just have played in the dome the next 100 years? I don't get how people completely flip out over this. Public funding for stadiums happens EVERYWHERE. There are a few exceptions like Dallas, but most cities have publicly funded stadiums. This deal favor the public more then any other I've seen in awhile. Taxes are not going up at all.
For the record, I love Target Field, but I was against using public money for that too. But, I'm not an elected official, and I didn't tell me representatives how I feel, so that part is my fault. Not that it would have done much good anyway.
You can come up with statistics to prove anything. Forty percent of all people know that.
Posted 11 May 2012 - 12:12 PM
Posted 26 May 2012 - 12:15 PM
Billionaire owners getting taxpayers to build a stadium. It's a disgrace, but desperate sports fans are too desperate to see how ridiculous it is.
Wealthy art patrons get funded to the tune of $16M a year via the Minnesota State Arts Board. The Guthrie Theater was remodeled using $25M of tax payer money. Minneapolis taxpayers funded $5M for the move of the Shubert Theater. Art aficionados are too desperate to see how ridiculous it is.
Posted 28 May 2012 - 11:35 PM